[0:00] Planning Commission for August 17th,

[0:02] 2026. Roll call. Mlan

[0:05] >> here.

[0:05] >> Bradshaw

[0:06] >> here.

[0:07] >> Uh Curtis is here. Visser

[0:09] >> present.

[0:09] >> Cutler is here.

[0:11] >> All right. Need a motion for the

[0:13] consideration of the meeting agenda.

[0:16] >> So moved.

[0:16] >> Moved by Cutler. Support by

[0:19] >> support.

[0:20] >> Mlan.

[0:22] Need further discussion. All those in

[0:24] favor say I. I.

[0:26] >> All those opposed. We have a agenda at

[0:28] this time. We will have a public comment

[0:31] period brief up to two minutes for

[0:33] anything uh anyone would like to talk

[0:35] about. Please note we will be having a

[0:37] public hearing for the item 6A public

[0:41] hearing in consideration of a special

[0:43] land use um for homebased business uh at

[0:47] a later time. So if you are here to talk

[0:49] about that, there's a separate time for

[0:51] that.

[0:57] » Please don't move. Okay. Hello. Good

[1:00] evening. I'm uh Danielle Grassid and

[1:03] I've only been to the Gaines Township

[1:06] meetings. So, I'm just going off of what

[1:09] I think I'm supposed to do. So, I I live

[1:11] in Calonia Township on 7010 Patterson.

[1:15] I'm right across the street from Gaines

[1:17] Township, though. So, I've been going to

[1:19] their meetings about the data center

[1:22] ordinance discussions.

[1:24] And um I I just noticed yours recently

[1:28] and I skimmed through it quick. Uh

[1:30] something I noticed was you didn't have

[1:32] anything specific to the DBC and tonal

[1:36] noise and it sounds like someone in the

[1:38] audience is going to have some

[1:40] information for you on that. I have a

[1:42] preschooler that's going to be going to

[1:44] Dutton Elementary. And so you guys have

[1:46] residents and a school really, really

[1:48] close to that border. And so I'm just

[1:52] trying to get maybe your township to

[1:55] help their township also meet some like

[1:59] stringent ordinance numbers to make it

[2:03] so we all enjoy our properties and our

[2:06] students aren't annoyed during the day.

[2:11] Yep. Okay. Thanks.

[2:12] >> Thank you.

[2:21] » Uh name is Greg Cummage. C O M E G YS

[2:26] live on 92nd Street. Been a resident of

[2:30] the township here for 40ome years, I

[2:33] believe. Now, uh on the on the subject

[2:35] of noise, um I want to address that

[2:38] later. five minute sessions, but I'd

[2:40] like to just um um sort of tell you

[2:44] about an experience my wife and I had

[2:46] with respect to noise. Um I had a high

[2:49] school reunion in South Meshawaka a

[2:51] couple weeks ago and on the way home I

[2:54] told my wife I said let's just swing by

[2:56] Dwag because it's in the news and people

[2:59] are suing because of the uh the sound

[3:02] situation. So we drove through through

[3:05] Dwajak and u located the site there and

[3:09] uh as soon as we opened the windows and

[3:11] we were parked on the street right in

[3:13] front of the residential area. Soon as

[3:15] we opened the windows our vehicle would

[3:18] just fill with this screeching whining

[3:22] uh noise just continuous noise. And uh I

[3:27] have a little app on my phone that

[3:29] measures dB with in the vehicle with the

[3:32] windows closed, the engine off. It was

[3:33] like 60. I got out and I walked into the

[3:36] facility. I didn't go beyond the uh the

[3:40] imposing uh gate and the red light and

[3:43] all that. I stopped short of that, took

[3:46] some pictures of the facility, and then

[3:48] measured the noise. It immediately

[3:50] jumped up to about 90 dB right there. Uh

[3:53] I hadn't been there too long. security

[3:55] guard worked his way across the parking

[3:57] lot and um confronted me and said,

[4:00] "You're on private property." And I

[4:02] said, "Well, I'm behind the gate." I

[4:04] said, "Okay." And he said, "I don't

[4:05] care. You're still on private property."

[4:07] Now, I went about 50 ft from the road on

[4:09] the little entrance drive to it. And he

[4:12] uh he said, "You're on private property.

[4:13] You're going to get out of here." So, he

[4:15] escorted me all the way back to our

[4:16] vehicle and then waited until we left.

[4:19] So, the noise is very palpable. This is

[4:22] a fairly small data center. compared to

[4:25] some of the monster ones.

[4:27] >> I'm sorry, your time is up.

[4:28] >> My time is up. All right. You You'll

[4:30] hear from me in five minutes time, too.

[4:33] >> Thank you, Greg.

[4:47] » Hi, I'm Kaylee Doring. I live at 5858

[4:49] Lawnmore Court in the Greymore

[4:51] neighborhood.

[4:53] Um, and just seeing that air data center

[4:56] ordinance discussion is on the agenda

[4:59] today, we sorry, I just want to

[5:04] reiterate the fact again that while that

[5:07] data center ordinance is very important,

[5:08] it's also important to remember that we

[5:11] still have the ability to look at our

[5:12] master plan. Um, well, you have the

[5:15] ability to look at the master plan and

[5:17] make some decisions on that and maybe

[5:19] just look at changing what the plan says

[5:22] instead of making some of those zones

[5:25] light industrial and maybe making them

[5:27] mixed use instead and making our

[5:29] community a better place to be as

[5:31] opposed to a place where we are inviting

[5:34] things like data centers or other things

[5:36] in light industrial zoning um to places

[5:40] like next to our neighborhood.

[5:42] Um, I also have

[5:48] uh

[5:50] a letter here that has been drafted just

[5:53] to kind of give some more information. I

[5:54] think some

[5:58] um things just to consider when going

[6:02] over that ordinance if I'm allowed to

[6:05] approach and give it to you. Is that

[6:08] allowed? Is that okay? Or I can give it

[6:10] to you, Miss Lenny.

[6:29] Thank you.

[6:36] So, I just want to um make clear that we

[6:39] will not be allowed to make comments uh

[6:42] during the discussion of the ordinance.

[6:44] Is that what I'm understanding?

[6:46] >> It's not a public hearing. No.

[6:49] >> Okay. And you won't make an exception

[6:50] for such?

[6:52] >> It's not a public hearing. No.

[6:55] >> Okay. Well, great. I'll head right to it

[6:57] then. Um so, number of issues. Deb

[7:00] Steady, by the way, uh resident There

[7:03] are a number of issues that need to be

[7:05] strengthened in this draft ordinance. I

[7:07] will deal with one important aspect,

[7:08] noise and vibration. Um, I'm going to

[7:11] pass out what was provided to me uh by

[7:15] pen future as a model ordinance and I

[7:17] think you can see the deficiencies in

[7:19] how this ordinance is dealing with

[7:21] noise. Um, specifically the application

[7:25] requires a detailed acoustic study to

[7:27] minimize noise and achieve a neutral

[7:28] impact on adjacent and neighboring

[7:30] nearby properties. How is neutral impact

[7:33] defined? Um, maximum overall noise limit

[7:36] is not specified. Section 3.61. Does

[7:40] this mean an equivalent continuous sound

[7:42] level? How will this be measured? Over

[7:44] what time frame will this be the same

[7:46] for all types of properties surrounding

[7:48] the data center? See the sample

[7:50] ordinance. Um, the use shall not exceed

[7:53] the decibel levels in the designated

[7:55] octave bands below. I couldn't find the

[7:58] octave bands below in that draft. Um

[8:02] same paragraph maximum overall noise

[8:04] limit shall be 60 dbas. The dBA scale uh

[8:07] scale only registers sound in the

[8:09] audible range. Um this eliminates the

[8:12] recording of pressure impulses below 20

[8:16] hertz referred to as infrasound

[8:19] significant health impacts on humans and

[8:21] animals. Section page 13, section 8, PC

[8:25] may authorize other or different

[8:27] alternative regulations and conditions,

[8:30] blah blah blah. An unelected

[8:33] commission should not have this

[8:34] authority. Any modification should

[8:36] require public hearings and township

[8:38] board approval. You got to clean up the

[8:40] setbacks on page five and 10. Um there's

[8:44] discrepancies in what each of those

[8:46] areas are presenting. Um

[8:49] >> thank you. Your time's up.

[8:51] >> Well, thank you.

[8:52] So what I will do is pass the model

[8:55] ordinance.

[8:56] >> Just excuse me. Excuse me. Stop.

[9:00] >> Give it to Miss Len and she will

[9:02] distribute it

[9:03] >> during the discussion or

[9:06] >> your time is up. Please give it to Miss

[9:08] Len and she will distribute it.

[9:09] >> I will persist and hand this out. Thank

[9:12] you

[9:14] >> for you as well. Attorney might be very

[9:17] interested.

[9:20] ordinances if you like to see it. You

[9:23] can throw it over your shoulder. Thank

[9:25] you.

[9:43] » Seeing no other public comment, we will

[9:45] close the brief public comment period.

[9:47] Uh at this time we need a um considerate

[9:50] a motion for the consideration of the

[9:52] meeting minutes for July 20th, 2026.

[9:55] >> So moved.

[9:56] >> Moved by Cutler, support by

[9:58] >> Yes, sir.

[10:02] » Any other changes, comments?

[10:05] All those in favor say I.

[10:06] >> I.

[10:07] >> All those opposed? Motion passes.

[10:09] Conflict of interest. Does anybody have

[10:12] a uh conflict of interest for any agenda

[10:14] item

[10:16] on tonight?

[10:18] Seeing none, we'll move to item 6A, new

[10:21] business. This is a public hearing in

[10:23] consideration of a special land use for

[10:24] a homebased business called Platinum

[10:26] Ponds. Special use enables a larger sign

[10:29] in the RR zoning district. Applicant is

[10:31] Ryan Parno, address 5380 with a parcel

[10:35] 412331209.

[10:38] [snorts]

[10:40] The applicant has asked us to

[10:43] uh postpone

[10:45] this item until a meeting in September

[10:48] due to a conflict. As the public uh um

[10:53] hearing was noticed, we will hold the

[10:56] public hearing at this time and likely

[11:00] at the next meeting as well.

[11:03] So if anybody's here to speak about

[11:06] item 6A,

[11:09] happy to hear.

[11:14] » Hold on. Hold on.

[11:20] » I mean, you both can come off at the

[11:24] same time.

[11:25] >> Okay. Right.

[11:27] >> Um, good evening. My name is Aaron. Um,

[11:30] I'm a resident of Calon. I live on Farm

[11:32] Grow Court. Uh we've lived there for a

[11:35] decade now. Um I I I was born and raised

[11:39] in West Michigan. Uh love Calonia area.

[11:42] A big reason uh that we moved here is

[11:45] the familyfriendly atmosphere. We have

[11:47] five children. My youngest is four. Um

[11:50] and I am here to speak and respectfully

[11:53] request that uh the board consider

[11:56] denying the motion. Um,

[11:58] my backyard butts up to that property

[12:01] and my youngest is four and I don't want

[12:03] him to, you know, have to play in a

[12:06] backyard with commercial business right

[12:09] there. I I think that it goes against

[12:13] the

[12:16] uh the atmosphere of our neighborhood.

[12:18] Um,

[12:20] and uh

[12:22] I I find it frustrating. I feel like as

[12:24] soon as they built there, they put up

[12:26] the sign and I believe it's more of a

[12:28] asking for forgiveness than permission.

[12:30] And so I would respectfully ask the

[12:33] township to consider declining that

[12:36] request. Thank you for your time.

[12:38] >> Yeah. Thank you, Erin.

[12:38] >> Thank you.

[12:46] » My name's Christine Broberg. I live on

[12:48] Farm Court as well. Now, the property in

[12:52] question does not come all the way into

[12:54] my backyard. We were caught off guard by

[12:57] the notice because we all saw the sign.

[13:01] Based on what I'm reading though, I need

[13:03] more information to know what it is

[13:05] exactly he wants. Does he just want a

[13:07] bigger sign or are we gonna are we

[13:09] talking about having gigantic machinery

[13:12] in the backyard that is actually making

[13:14] it look like it's almost like a

[13:16] construction type business that's in our

[13:18] neighborhood? and there wasn't enough

[13:21] information presented yet for us to have

[13:23] any sort of ability to research or

[13:27] understand what it is that's being asked

[13:29] because according to what I'm reading in

[13:31] the agenda, it looks like he just wants

[13:32] a bigger sign.

[13:35] And so that's we're just looking for

[13:36] more information before we would even be

[13:38] able to give a proper

[13:42] opinion on what it would what we agree

[13:44] with or not. So that's what we're

[13:46] looking for. at least a chunk of us.

[13:49] >> Thank you.

[13:50] >> All right. Thank you.

[14:03] » Hi, thank you for um hearing my

[14:05] comments. My name is Laura Burr. I'm

[14:06] Aaron's wife. Um I am almost a lifelong

[14:09] resident of Calonia. We moved to Calonia

[14:11] when I was eight. I grew up at 491

[14:13] Johnson in the old um Fingfinder

[14:16] farmhouse there. Um and really have

[14:18] lived in in Calonia outside of the time

[14:20] that um we lived in Cleveland when Aaron

[14:22] was in law school. Um I understand that

[14:28] the the um the farm that's right behind

[14:31] us sold that property um for the house

[14:34] that was then built there. That's fine.

[14:36] That's the farmer's prerogative to do

[14:37] that. But, um, I I kind of, as Erin

[14:41] said, I I it feels like they're asking

[14:43] for more forgiveness for this zoning,

[14:47] um, than permission because the sign's

[14:49] been up for quite a while. The business

[14:51] address on Platinum Pal's website is

[14:53] listed at that location. It's already

[14:56] listed there. So, that doesn't sound

[14:58] like we had a business, we have a

[14:59] business elsewhere that we're going to

[15:01] move here. And it's been in business

[15:02] since 2015. Um, so I don't know where

[15:05] they were operating prior to the last

[15:08] year or so, but um, it it just doesn't

[15:11] feel great that that's right behind us.

[15:13] That, as Aaron said, that affects my

[15:14] family. That affects our property

[15:16] values. Um, too, having a commercial

[15:17] zoning site directly behind us. Um, and

[15:21] Calonia has changed a lot in the the

[15:24] years that I've lived here. Um, we used

[15:26] to call it Cowonia affectionately when I was younger because it was such a

[15:30] rural community. Um, and I I get that

[15:32] the wheels of time continue to move and I'm not arguing against, you know,

[15:36] certain in general the fact that

[15:39] development continues to happen. Um, but

[15:42] we don't always have to say yes. It

[15:43] doesn't always have to happen. Um, and

[15:45] especially on on my street when it

[15:47] affects me directly in my backyard, I

[15:49] would really respectfully request the

[15:50] township um deny the the uh reszoning of

[15:54] that property. Thank you.

[15:56] >> Thank you.

[16:07] Can I put a new item? Hold on.

[16:11] >> Not in the middle of something else.

[16:16] » Uh well, I have to close it. Um at this

[16:19] time, we'll close the public uh hearing

[16:22] for item 6A. Uh no action is planned on

[16:27] that tonight. Mr. this.

[16:29] >> Uh, new I'd like to add an agenda item

[16:32] for discussion. Um, if I can for next

[16:36] meeting.

[16:37] >> Yeah, let's get that at the end.

[16:39] >> Okay. Thank you.

[16:42] >> I thought you meant tonight. I'm like

[16:44] that time pass. [clears throat]

[16:49] » Any other

[16:51] >> um I I don't know if you want to have

[16:53] Len do any brief introduction on it. I

[16:56] know. Yeah, I mean we have people who

[16:58] want to kind of know about it. So, can

[16:59] you do the five minute quick

[17:03] what's

[17:04] >> Yes. And I don't have my whole file

[17:05] here, but um the applicant has requested

[17:08] to postpone this uh hearing item until

[17:11] the September 21st meeting. So, he was

[17:14] going to be out of town tonight. So,

[17:16] requested that this continue into the

[17:18] September date. Uh my understanding is

[17:21] that the applicant does have an

[17:23] accessory building on site. There are um

[17:27] there's a dumpster he plans to keep on

[17:30] site, he said to to enable him to, you

[17:35] know, uh

[17:37] dispose of items from other sites where

[17:41] he builds ponds and pools. Um the zoning

[17:46] inspector has been out to the property

[17:49] because we did get a complaint about the

[17:51] sign. So, a sign was put up. It's larger

[17:54] than we allow in the residential the RR

[17:57] zoning district. The only way to have a

[17:59] larger sign is through the homebased

[18:02] business process. Um he claims that he

[18:07] is not conducting a homebased business

[18:09] despite the sign being there and all of

[18:12] the you know Google documentation and

[18:15] research we've done that uh ties the

[18:18] business to his home. He has materials

[18:22] stored on the property. Um, and he has

[18:26] provided us a plan for building his own

[18:30] pond/pool

[18:32] on the property and said that the

[18:34] materials that he has there he bought on

[18:37] discount on sale at the end of the

[18:39] season and they're stored there for his

[18:41] project at home. He did provide in his

[18:45] application that he rents space for his

[18:50] business um in Wyoming and somewhere

[18:53] else in Kentwood where he stores

[18:56] equipment for the business there. Um we

[19:00] have not visited those sites. Um he did

[19:03] mention he has two employees but he said

[19:06] that they do not operate out of the home

[19:09] on 100th Street. Again, we're not out

[19:13] there at all hours of the day inspecting

[19:16] that and verifying that. Um, that's just

[19:18] the information that we have today. Um,

[19:22] so the purpose

[19:25] is, you know, whether whether we grant a

[19:27] homebased business there is is number

[19:30] one. And if he has a homebased business,

[19:33] then this uh special use because

[19:36] homebased business is a special use that

[19:40] you can also consider a bigger sign. I

[19:43] don't think we could just allow a bigger

[19:45] sign unless we say yes to the homebased

[19:48] business too, right? They go together.

[19:50] Um so that's the information we have

[19:52] today. Um, we can provide any other

[19:57] packet information for neighbors. Um, if

[20:01] you stop by our office or send an email,

[20:04] we can we can share that with you. Um,

[20:07] but that's what I have. I think the rest

[20:10] of it we will look at um in September.

[20:16] » All right, Christine, if you want to

[20:19] grab that from Miss Len at some point.

[20:23] Um, it's just the application so you can

[20:25] actually read it. Um, all right. At this

[20:28] time, I will make a motion to I've

[20:31] learned postpone

[20:34] um item 6A

[20:36] >> until the September

[20:38] what meeting?

[20:40] >> 21st meeting.

[20:41] >> Motion to postpone item 6A to the

[20:44] September 21st meeting per the

[20:46] applicant's request.

[20:51] supported

[20:54] >> motion by Bradshaw, support by Visser.

[20:56] Any further discussion on this?

[20:58] >> All those in favor of postponing say I.

[21:01] >> All those opposed, motion to postpone

[21:04] pass.

[21:05] >> All right. The data center ordinance we

[21:09] have in front of us. I'm assuming

[21:10] everybody has read through it. I have

[21:13] seen a lot of red marks. Um I think

[21:17] we'll just start right into the red

[21:18] marks. Miss Len, I think that's the

[21:20] easiest thing.

[21:21] >> Sure.

[21:21] >> To do it.

[21:23] >> Um

[21:24] so

[21:26] >> also, Mr. Chairman, just go ahead. Our

[21:28] attorney Ross Leman is here

[21:30] >> um to provide support and some guidance

[21:34] and best practice. He's been working

[21:36] with other municipalities in uh northern

[21:40] county also on this topic of the data

[21:43] center. Um, our draft is modeled after

[21:47] draft ordinances that uh, Ross and his

[21:51] team have been working on in um, a

[21:54] couple other communities similar to

[21:56] Calonia Township. I did provide Ross

[21:59] with an overview and the minutes from

[22:02] previous discussions from planning

[22:04] commission. Um, I know at our last

[22:07] meeting we talked about buffering and

[22:11] um, sound panels. That was the topic. Uh

[22:15] the the difference between I1 and I2 and

[22:19] whether this use could or should be in

[22:22] I2 versus I1. Um there were questions

[22:26] related to decommissioning.

[22:29] There were questions and concerns about

[22:31] battery fires and so I had him look at

[22:34] that in our code as well as utility

[22:37] upgrades and extensions. And so, um, he

[22:41] did look at those items. He can speak

[22:44] further on that. Um, but I know that you

[22:47] also have things you want to talk about.

[22:49] And so, now is a great time for us to

[22:51] utilize his expertise

[22:54] um, for the conversation today.

[22:56] >> Great.

[22:57] >> Yeah.

[22:57] >> Thank you, Ross. Um, so, let me start

[23:00] off. There's [snorts] there's really two

[23:03] ordinance sections. There's the 3.61

[23:06] and the

[23:10] Sorry, the 16.55.

[23:13] >> Correct.

[23:14] Yes.

[23:15] >> 3.61 is by right. 16.55 is special land

[23:19] use. Correct.

[23:20] >> Yep. Chapter 16 is our special land use.

[23:23] Section 3.61 is is our general

[23:26] provisions and general provisions apply

[23:29] to any uh any use in any district if if

[23:34] it's applicable.

[23:35] >> Um. Yep.

[23:37] >> All right. So,

[23:39] Mine is just I focused on the

[23:42] differences between the two sections

[23:43] that were conflicting

[23:46] >> that that needs to be addressed. Um and

[23:49] I can pass these notes later. Um

[23:53] uh 3 point the first note I have is 3.61

[23:58] limits digital mining operations to 9

[24:00] to5 but 1655 does not repeat that um and

[24:06] allows us to set

[24:08] Um that

[24:10] and

[24:12] in 361

[24:14] there's a we need to cl my opinion we

[24:17] need to clarify whether the fix section

[24:20] 3.61 digital mining hours apply to

[24:22] medium scale and hypers scale digital

[24:25] mining special land uses whether 1655

[24:28] allows different approved op there's an

[24:30] operating hour issue. On a more

[24:34] interesting note, um if the high utility

[24:39] usage is during the daytime hours,

[24:42] so if the confliction is if if the

[24:46] there's two conflictions going on. Um

[24:49] one, we want to have the noise during

[24:50] the day, but then on the flip side,

[24:55] um why you're looking at me?

[24:58] >> I just don't feel like I have the same

[24:59] paper that you do. I printed it off from

[25:01] online.

[25:02] >> Okay. So that's probably why. [laughter]

[25:06] >> Um, so we want we want the noise during

[25:09] the day, not at night, but the electric

[25:11] usage

[25:13] in general is higher

[25:16] >> to the grid during the daytime than it

[25:18] is at night. So I just question the

[25:22] hours and what we're trying to

[25:23] accomplish and make sure we have

[25:25] consistency

[25:26] >> between the two.

[25:30] Um in the 1655

[25:34] um there's some setback issues that

[25:37] conflict with 3.61

[25:39] that we just need to make sure that

[25:42] we have those

[25:47] um in alignment that we have.

[25:49] >> Do you have like page numbers? I can't

[25:50] keep up with

[25:59] Sorry, I had to summarize it a lot

[26:01] because it's all over the place because

[26:03] they're in two different spots.

[26:05] >> So, there's setbacks on page five.

[26:07] >> Yep. Setbacks are on five and then again

[26:10] they are on page

[26:16] » I mean the the solution isn't to solve

[26:18] it tonight. It's just to point out that

[26:20] there's

[26:21] >> and page 10

[26:23] >> and 10.

[26:28] » So we have 1,000 ft and 500 ft.

[26:32] Um

[26:38] but we need to understand if in 361 if

[26:42] it is different.

[26:46] Um

[26:50] there's a I believe an incorrect cross

[26:53] reference in 361 because it refers to

[26:56] 339 C and D. Um

[27:00] which may not be the right cross

[27:01] references. [snorts]

[27:04] Um

[27:06] 1655 prohibits

[27:08] trying to get there for you Tim. um

[27:11] private wells

[27:15] um for general cooling or processing

[27:18] purpose. And 361 just requires a

[27:22] disclosure of the water source and

[27:23] cooling method without prohibiting

[27:25] private wells.

[27:31] You follow me? I know.

[27:42] Okay.

[27:43] >> Um

[27:49] 1655

[27:52] requires a connection to public water

[27:54] that allows alternative water and sewer

[27:57] facilities if water water usage is low

[28:00] water usage is demonstrated.

[28:03] 361 requires a disclosure and analysis

[28:06] of the water supply but does not require

[28:08] public water and sewer

[28:11] connection.

[28:15] Um then the issue of noise

[28:19] um which was brought up um

[28:24] they're not aligned

[28:27] um as to how between the the two

[28:30] sections.

[28:32] Um

[28:34] 361 requires

[28:36] water cooled systems to use the closed

[28:39] cooling system. 1655 adds that open

[28:42] evaporative cooling towers are

[28:44] prohibited. So in 1655 it's prohibited

[28:48] but 3.61 it's not specifically

[28:51] prohibited.

[28:53] Um

[28:54] >> so the special land use is only for the

[28:57] h the not all of these go to special

[29:01] use. Right.

[29:02] >> Right.

[29:03] But if we're going to have stringent

[29:06] requirements, they should be

[29:09] matched up. Like if we're going to not

[29:11] allow

[29:13] cooling towers,

[29:15] >> per se,

[29:16] >> why do we allow it in a special land use

[29:19] or vice versa?

[29:21] >> Yeah.

[29:24] Um

[29:33] 361 requires operational equipment to be

[29:37] located within uh cooling and power

[29:40] generation to be located in an enclosed

[29:43] building or structure and less weigh.

[29:46] 1655 requires roof mounted equipment to

[29:49] be screened on four on four sides.

[29:52] Clarify whether the roof mounted may

[29:54] remain outside in a closed building if

[29:56] screened or whether they should not be

[29:59] um

[30:05] battery. There seems to be a confliction

[30:08] in the

[30:10] NFPA

[30:13] um requirements.

[30:17] Um 1655 doesn't expressly reference NFPA

[30:21] 855.

[30:26] Um

[30:31] annual inspections.

[30:35] um

[30:40] requires an agreement for that that's

[30:43] reimbursed.

[30:45] Um

[30:50] and clarify 1655 is the annual

[30:53] inspection and reimbursement

[30:54] requirements and check 3.61 for

[30:58] periodic.

[31:00] One's annual, one's periodic.

[31:02] Do we want to have them

[31:04] Again, I'm not advocating for a change.

[31:06] I'm just saying there's a difference

[31:07] between the two. Do we want annual or do

[31:09] we want periodic? And is periodic fine.

[31:14] >> All right, that's all I have. Just

[31:16] differences between the two.

[31:22] Pass that.

[31:23] >> You might need it for conversation. I

[31:25] don't think you want to give it away

[31:26] yet.

[31:30] » Um

[31:33] Okay, that was a lot.

[31:35] >> Yeah.

[31:36] >> So, the what I'm hearing is the

[31:39] clarification between what's required

[31:42] and the general provisions for all all

[31:46] of these uses at whatever scale like

[31:49] small, medium, hyper versus what we have

[31:53] in the requirements for special use

[31:56] standards where we treat the hyper scale

[32:00] and medium scale.

[32:03] Do we want to have separate or do we

[32:05] want them to be the same requirements

[32:09] >> because it's we seem I mean you're going

[32:12] to have the same

[32:14] equipment maybe just not the same

[32:16] quantity of equipment.

[32:17] >> Right. Right.

[32:19] And in your mind are you feeling like no

[32:22] matter how small, large, hyper,

[32:26] it should be consistent?

[32:28] >> Yes.

[32:29] >> Okay.

[32:31] >> Consistency is much easier to

[32:35] um a quantify and b there's no well I

[32:40] thought this I thought that at a later

[32:43] point in time

[32:45] and I read in one of the comments that

[32:47] even the small scale five megawatt um

[32:54] at least in the account here is that

[32:56] it's sufficient power

[33:00] sufficient to power 750 homes

[33:04] for one megawatt. So a 5 megawatt no

[33:08] exponential yeah 3 to 4,000 homes

[33:18] and their opinion is that not no data

[33:21] center project regardless of megawatt

[33:23] size should be allowed as a use by

[33:25] right.

[33:27] So that's a, you know, back to you as a

[33:30] planning commission. Would it, do we

[33:33] even want to have any of them be by

[33:37] right or just move them all to special

[33:39] land use?

[33:44] » I just have a question here.

[33:46] >> Going back to section 8.4,

[33:50] looks like there's been an addition. It

[33:53] says building size. We did add something

[33:55] on building size. Yes.

[33:57] >> Okay. So, 20 thou 200,000 square feet.

[34:01] That's four acres. Just a little over

[34:04] four acres.

[34:05] Then the minimum lot size has to be 40

[34:08] acres. Is that right? So, that's a 10%

[34:10] coverage ratio. And the max that they

[34:13] can do, it's got a building height, so

[34:16] of 25 ft. So, you got a million cubic

[34:18] feet.

[34:20] Um,

[34:22] I don't know. I just I think that should

[34:24] do it. I mean, nobody's going to come

[34:26] here and do that project.

[34:28] [laughter] That should about wrap it up.

[34:30] I mean, as far as I'm concerned,

[34:35] make it you can make it as of right. You

[34:37] can, you know, make [clears throat] it

[34:40] special land use permit. It's done. I

[34:42] mean, you just you add that to it and we

[34:47] ain't got to deal with anything.

[34:48] >> I mean, at the end of the day, again, it

[34:51] goes to consistency.

[34:53] special eight section 8 like you said in

[34:56] the by right you know

[34:58] >> I'm just telling you that practically

[34:59] speaking it don't matter

[35:01] >> I understand

[35:03] >> yeah so

[35:12] » yes

[35:14] >> sorry I can't see your eyes

[35:16] >> um page two under um item number nine

[35:19] medium scale data center um goes

[35:23] megawatt and 99.

[35:26] Should we take that up to 100 so that

[35:29] it's we have consistency between

[35:33] um

[35:34] the different sizes? We don't have hole

[35:36] in the middle of it.

[35:37] >> Yeah, it's not 99.5.

[35:39] >> Yeah.

[35:40] I saw that too.

[35:43] >> It should be up to

[35:45] >> 100

[35:49] more there.

[35:50] >> Yes. And that's consistent within item

[35:53] number 12.

[36:10] So I do have a question on the digital

[36:12] mining as to why we're treating that

[36:15] separately.

[36:17] Um

[36:20] because Some kid could be doing that in

[36:22] his house. Are they now,

[36:26] >> you know, under that ordinance?

[36:30] >> Yeah, go ahead.

[36:30] >> I I can comment on that if you want.

[36:32] >> Yeah, please.

[36:33] >> Um, so digital I'm not an engineer. Uh,

[36:37] but um what uh we've been hearing out

[36:41] there a lot is that actually the noisy

[36:43] ones like the guy said he went to that

[36:45] was really noisy. often that ends up

[36:47] being the digital mining that there's a

[36:50] big big noise difference with the

[36:52] cooling that's required in the fans and

[36:55] that between digital mining and regular

[36:57] data centers. So that was actually one

[36:59] thing I was going to note when you were

[37:01] talking about noise uh that as these

[37:03] ordinances have developed is they've

[37:06] even made um greater treatments and

[37:08] distinctions of digital mining versus

[37:10] other data centers because other data

[37:12] centers tend to be quieter. Uh and so

[37:16] for example, one thing you could

[37:17] consider is saying all digital mining

[37:20] shall occur only in small scale or

[37:23] medium scale and not on a hypers scale

[37:25] basis. That is just too much. So that

[37:28] that's why digital mining is referred to

[37:31] differently. And again, I'm not an

[37:32] engineer, but that's been something

[37:35] fairly consistent um that you want to be

[37:39] more restrictive and take extra steps

[37:41] because digital mining is noisier.

[37:47] But if I'm

[37:49] buying server time,

[37:53] you know, in the in the data center, I

[37:57] can use it for

[38:00] when I'm using I mean, I might use it

[38:02] for digital mining and people might not

[38:04] even know.

[38:06] >> Yeah. It's just not as efficient. Right.

[38:08] >> Right.

[38:09] >> I mean, that's the problem is like the

[38:11] chips, you know, it's like a Nvidia chip

[38:14] and just takes more cooling load than

[38:17] the other like a server. So you could mine crypto uh colo server.

[38:23] >> Right.

[38:23] But it's not you know

[38:26] >> it's not going to pay. It just doesn't

[38:27] make sense. So people just don't do it.

[38:29] And so they do this because you know

[38:32] they get more processing power per

[38:33] kilowatt.

[38:35] >> Yeah.

[38:36] >> But policy you could take it out. You

[38:38] could say we're just going to regulate

[38:39] data centers and we're not going to

[38:41] distinguish it. That's the reason

[38:43] >> that I've heard and that we've been

[38:46] putting into different ordinances is

[38:48] because of the no different in noise

[38:50] level.

[38:52] >> So if it's

[38:56] and maybe I missed it if it's a digital

[39:00] mining

[39:03] do we have

[39:06] noise requirements

[39:08] and I missed it. While we're digital

[39:11] mining are

[39:13] >> we're using the same for digital land

[39:16] >> right

[39:16] >> data centers

[39:17] >> correct

[39:22] » so it should be like the lesser

[39:25] noise like not more noise but the one

[39:29] requiring less noise.

[39:37] » Yeah.

[39:39] Are you guys in in your experience are

[39:42] there

[39:44] like are they putting more cell towers

[39:45] or any sort of digital like data

[39:47] transmission stuff like alongside or

[39:50] next to or you know with data centers at

[39:53] this point in time? Is there any

[39:55] progression towards that

[39:57] like microwave towers you know any like

[40:00] a cell tower that would basically hook

[40:02] that directly into a data center?

[40:05] >> Uh I've not run into that. There's been

[40:07] a lot of talk about um energy generation

[40:10] affiliated with data centers, you know,

[40:13] and you know, whether they're going to

[40:15] have um whether they're going to grab it

[40:17] all off the grid or if they're going to

[40:19] have um well, you already have it where

[40:20] your generators have to be for non

[40:24] generation. But if you could have solar,

[40:26] you could have wind, you could have

[40:27] diesel,

[40:28] >> um you know, different on-site

[40:30] generation type thing. And they tend to

[40:32] want to locate them by substations and

[40:35] other things like that. I've not heard

[40:37] much about um uh cell towers, but I

[40:42] would think if it would come then your

[40:44] general cell tower regulations would

[40:47] apply just like probably right now the

[40:49] way it is. If somebody comes and wants

[40:51] to do a solar project with it, you

[40:54] probably have to meet all your solar

[40:56] regulations in addition to the data

[40:58] mining ones

[41:00] or or the data center and the digital

[41:02] mining. I was going to comment on your

[41:05] comment about um the different

[41:07] standards. Um the reason for that um is

[41:13] the thinking behind that is you have a

[41:15] general section just like you do for

[41:16] accessory buildings or something like

[41:18] that that provides your base regulations

[41:21] and that that primarily is dealing with

[41:25] um small scale and accessory and

[41:27] anything that would fall between the

[41:28] cracks. And so those tend to be more

[41:31] consistent with the regulations that you

[41:33] do for other businesses. Um and and

[41:36] actually maybe one thing you might want

[41:37] to do is lower the I guess I've not

[41:41] heard it that that a 5 megawatt data

[41:44] center will power thousands of homes.

[41:46] >> Uh but I have heard that you know it

[41:48] does more. But the idea is that the

[41:50] small scale and the accessory are more

[41:54] similar to other businesses and so they

[41:56] would be treated more consistently with

[41:58] other businesses. And that your medium

[42:01] scale and your hypers scale then have to

[42:03] come in for special land use. And so

[42:05] they have um a lot of additional

[42:08] requirements that aren't necessarily

[42:10] reasonable if somebody's coming in, you

[42:13] know, to do something that's similar to

[42:15] a different business that you wouldn't

[42:17] require that for. But I also have seen

[42:20] uh and have done it for townships that

[42:23] would prefer to make all of them special

[42:25] land uses. Just say if you're doing

[42:27] anything data centerwise, it's a special

[42:29] land use period. Um so that's and and

[42:32] the way you would do that is you the

[42:34] same structure, but you would just have

[42:36] a general section defining it. And then

[42:40] um say if you want, you know, to

[42:41] actually get it approved, you got to

[42:43] come in for special land use.

[42:46] So that that is if you like that model

[42:49] better, you can do it. It's it's fairly

[42:51] similar. But the idea of this is to

[42:54] provide,

[42:55] you know, some distinguishing

[42:56] characteristics for things that might be

[42:59] more consistent. Whereas the medium

[43:02] scale and hypers scale are kind of

[43:04] things of their own.

[43:08] >> It's almost I don't know like you have

[43:11] the accessory data center is

[43:14] at someone's data center at their

[43:16] business type of level and then we have

[43:21] the other the small medium large

[43:24] extra large

[43:28] the general maybe cover just accessory.

[43:36] » Um, if I can chime in to Don's question.

[43:39] So, when switch first went in, whatever

[43:42] it was, 13, 14, 15, long time ago. Um I

[43:47] was the city engineer at Kentwood at the

[43:49] time and it's not necessarily your

[43:52] question was more about like cell towers

[43:54] and um through the air transmission but

[43:57] every fiber provider that I think exists

[44:00] in Michigan put fiber in along East

[44:02] Paris. So East Paris is either somewhere

[44:05] between a three and five lane road

[44:07] depending on where you're driving. But

[44:09] when it comes to fiber infrastructure

[44:11] it's like 131. It's the super highway.

[44:13] there is so much data running north and

[44:15] south and I think that 60th is similar

[44:19] but that wasn't under my permitting

[44:20] jurisdiction for like an east west

[44:22] route. Um so yes there's lots of other

[44:27] implications to move all of that data to

[44:29] get it to and from you know building in

[44:31] the center.

[44:37] » Um and I guess

[44:39] >> want to continue to have the floor. Um,

[44:42] I'm going to try to go through mine like

[44:44] page number and section and just kind of

[44:47] work through it. That works better for

[44:49] me to follow along. So, my first comment

[44:52] is on page four, uh,

[44:56] section

[44:59] I guess C10

[45:03] D

[45:05] six. It's a big uh jump down, but it's

[45:11] just that a community impact analysis is

[45:14] required. That's not really defined

[45:15] anywhere in the draft ordinance. And

[45:18] generally, I just find that to be vague,

[45:20] like what what are we looking for? So,

[45:23] let's be a little bit more clear on what

[45:25] that is and what we want.

[45:28] Um

[45:28] >> I'm thinking schools um public safety

[45:37] traffic management construction.

[45:44] » Okay.

[45:47] >> It is.

[45:47] >> I think so. Okay. Well, maybe I didn't

[45:50] catch it because I kept reading. Yeah.

[45:52] >> Um

[45:54] >> I keep going in that same section. And

[45:58] um item number nine, a detailed

[46:01] emissions and air quality impact

[46:03] analysis including backup generator

[46:05] usage. And in my, you know, again, I'm

[46:10] not an expert in these things yet,

[46:12] getting a little bit better every month.

[46:13] But I feel like we need to include

[46:15] temperature changes at discharge.

[46:18] From the reading I've done, it sounds

[46:20] like depending on scale, especially

[46:22] hypers scale data centers, they kind of

[46:25] make small heat islands. And depending

[46:27] on which way the wind blows, now it's a

[46:30] few degrees warmer at your property all

[46:31] the time because of the heat that's

[46:33] coming off these things.

[46:36] Um,

[46:38] continuing on that same page at the

[46:40] bottom of page four, talking general

[46:43] regulations and noise levels sub I, we

[46:47] talk about the maximum overall noise

[46:48] limit shall be 60 dva during daytime

[46:51] hours and 45 dva during nighttime hours,

[46:55] which are 1000 p.m. to 7 a.m. at the

[46:58] property line. Um,

[47:01] I'm a nerd. I volunteer and do the

[47:03] soundboard at my church. We have a

[47:05] little meter because we want to make

[47:07] sure that it's not too loud for people

[47:08] while they're singing the songs and that

[47:10] the pastor isn't too loud with his

[47:13] microphone. So 60 is kind of 65 is like

[47:18] the target for when the pastor's

[47:20] speaking and the music is closer to 80.

[47:23] Um I feel like 60 even during the day is

[47:27] way too high. Like

[47:30] that's how can that be okay at a mall to

[47:33] constantly have background noise this

[47:35] the volume of a conversation at your

[47:38] home. I can't get the yes. Um so I feel

[47:42] like we need to look at something lower

[47:45] whether that's 55 or 50. I I don't know

[47:48] what's a more reasonable threshold but

[47:51] 60 seems very high.

[47:54] Um

[47:58] Continuing to the top of page five, sub

[48:00] item two. I feel like maybe we should

[48:04] define daytime hours to be 8:00 a.m. to

[48:07] 5:00 p.m. It's been a long time since I

[48:10] had little kids, but um even this time

[48:12] of year back when they were little, they

[48:14] might already be in bed at 7:30 and I

[48:17] don't want them to wake up if they're

[48:19] already in bed. So, and sometimes in the

[48:21] summer it's light out till 9:45. So,

[48:24] let's be specific.

[48:27] Um,

[48:30] sub item three, right below that,

[48:33] if they're not complying with the

[48:35] ordinance, what are our tools in the

[48:37] toolbox? Do we go out there with a

[48:40] decibel meter and say, "Well, geez, it's

[48:43] 65 dB at the property line. We just

[48:46] write them a municipal civil infraction

[48:48] ticket for $75 or whatever that is

[48:51] allowed to be. [clears throat]

[48:54] How do we police this?

[49:00] Um, that's everything that I have on

[49:02] page five. Got some little minor

[49:07] spelling things on other pages. I'll

[49:09] skip those.

[49:11] Um,

[49:16] must be page seven. Yep. At the bottom

[49:19] of page seven under safety talks about

[49:22] the equipment used in any data center or

[49:24] digital mining use shall be house

[49:25] nanometered electrically grounded blah blah and it needs to resist an

[49:29] internal electrical fire for at least 30

[49:31] minutes. I am not an expert in the fire

[49:33] code but 30 minutes for a building of

[49:36] that magnitude and risk and danger seems

[49:38] super small. Um residential homes are

[49:41] usually one hour if it's an apartment

[49:43] complex with you know multi-use

[49:46] dwelling. There's a lot of two-hour

[49:47] rated walls. I'm just not understanding

[49:49] how we're 30 minutes for a data center.

[49:53] >> And just to pause there because I had

[49:56] flagged this one. I don't understand.

[49:59] You shall be housed in a metered

[50:04] um metal in case I don't know what a

[50:08] meter metal enclosure is.

[50:10] >> Yeah, I I assume it's metering power in

[50:12] and out, but

[50:14] [laughter]

[50:18] Yeah, take the meter out of there. I

[50:21] don't think it Who's paying for it?

[50:26] » It was It That's small minor, but it's

[50:32] » um I think I only got a couple more. So,

[50:34] almost done. top of page eight under sub

[50:37] item four, right before item 15, it just

[50:40] talks about

[50:43] uh any applicable local, state, or

[50:46] federal laws, rules, or eight

[50:47] regulations. I I don't know what the

[50:49] eight regulations are.

[50:52] >> Okay.

[50:56] So, I think that's a typo.

[51:01] I think it's code section 8 is the

[51:03] player code if I remember right, but I

[51:05] might have it wrong.

[51:08] >> Uh toward the bottom of page eight under

[51:11] decommissioning requirements sub item

[51:13] one, a financial guarantee bond or

[51:15] escrow shall be required to ensure

[51:17] adequate funds for decommissioning. Feel

[51:19] like we need to add as determined by the

[51:22] township and

[51:25] even that makes me a little leery. um

[51:29] you know, how are we going to accurately

[51:31] understand the cost of what it's going

[51:33] to take to knock this thing down or

[51:37] decommission it so that it can be re

[51:39] reused to be something else potentially.

[51:42] Um

[51:43] there's a lot of complexity to that and

[51:47] that would be hard for me to try to

[51:49] guess at the right number.

[51:54] » Perhaps hire somebody from Consumers

[51:56] Energy. Well, then it's free.

[52:01] Be like, "Oh, yeah. Volunteers will be

[52:03] out tomorrow."

[52:07] Um,

[52:09] and then I just said there's a lot of

[52:11] like little tab indentation

[52:14] typo things that I felt like on page 14.

[52:17] And

[52:20] that was my main comments,

[52:23] but I think

[52:25] we've made good progress from the first

[52:27] time we had a draft ordinance. I feel

[52:29] like we still have a lot of progress to

[52:31] continue to make. This is really complex

[52:33] and important. Um, and we want to make

[52:37] sure that we're happy with it before

[52:38] it's done.

[52:42] » Yeah, because we have time to get it

[52:43] right.

[52:48] » Do we have something in here about the

[52:49] architectural standards, too?

[52:52] We already have architectural standards

[52:54] in the ordinance for industrial

[52:56] buildings. So they would have to conform

[52:58] to that.

[52:59] >> Okay.

[53:00] >> That's in general.

[53:01] >> Do we want them to conform to

[53:04] is this is this I guess structurally

[53:07] speaking is this coming down as a

[53:09] subpart of industrial or are now we

[53:12] setting up basically an entirely

[53:14] different

[53:16] zoning district which is for data

[53:18] center. We're not doing that. So it's

[53:19] under industrial. Okay.

[53:21] >> Correct. Right now it's light

[53:23] industrial.

[53:24] >> What if we put it under office?

[53:26] >> We don't have an office district. We

[53:28] have light industrial, heavy industrial.

[53:32] >> We have commercial.

[53:34] >> Well, what do we what do what do we do?

[53:36] All the architectural standard work

[53:39] is for it's in general provisions and we

[53:42] regulate it for commercial, office,

[53:44] industrial.

[53:46] >> Okay. So any any use in industrial would

[53:48] have to conform to the architectural.

[53:51] >> Okay. Which then and that's the ones

[53:52] that we just did two months ago we

[53:54] finalized with industrial architectural

[53:56] standards. Correct. Correct.

[53:57] >> Okay. Cool.

[53:59] >> Yeah. So that's like

[54:02] >> that stack.

[54:04] Yeah. Right.

[54:05] >> So this is like that jigsaw that we're

[54:07] piecing together.

[54:08] >> So they have to meet all those

[54:09] architectural standards as well.

[54:11] >> Correct.

[54:15] along with the height and the square

[54:17] foot and lot coverage and

[54:20] >> they'll be they'll they'll be all right

[54:22] with all that.

[54:22] >> Yeah.

[54:28] » Mr. Mlan,

[54:30] did we beat it up or do you have

[54:31] >> You did good.

[54:38] What is the feeling about I think we

[54:40] still need to talk about whether we move

[54:42] these all into special use. I think

[54:45] there's also that question we want to make

[54:50] you to decide are we keeping it all in

[54:54] the light industrial where it is today

[54:59] or there was a question about moving it

[55:02] into heavy industrial. I shared We only

[55:05] have one parcel heavy industrial. It's

[55:08] where the concrete plant is. It's

[55:10] smaller than 40 acres already used by

[55:15] someone. Um

[55:17] so there's that concern that we're

[55:19] writing an ordinance that

[55:24] has nowhere to go.

[55:26] >> Exclusionary.

[55:27] >> Correct.

[55:33] Which, correct me, Mr. Attorney, because

[55:35] I'm a lean engineer, exclusionary

[55:38] ordinances are not allowed. Correct.

[55:41] >> Uh, that's correct. Although it looks

[55:43] like right now you're putting in your

[55:45] light industrial and you have a lot more

[55:47] light industrial land. Um, they don't

[55:50] have to line up exactly,

[55:53] but I think Len has a fair point. uh

[55:56] uniquely to your situation that your I2

[55:59] there's nothing available, you know, so

[56:02] that that might be a little bit of a um

[56:04] of an issue. Um but uh for most of the

[56:10] digital mining data center stuff that's

[56:13] going in,

[56:15] um there aren't lands that large, so

[56:18] they're going to involve reszonings, you

[56:21] know, so it's it's kind of a blended

[56:22] scale. Um, so anyway, but the

[56:28] I2 district for you guys might be an

[56:30] issue unless you're going to do some

[56:33] changes

[56:34] >> unless we expand it.

[56:35] >> Yeah,

[56:36] >> essentially is what you're saying.

[56:37] >> Yeah,

[56:37] >> I don't know that any of us are really

[56:39] excited about that. Yeah, I mean I'm

[56:42] torn because I do feel like the I2 use

[56:45] much better aligns with the data center,

[56:47] but I don't know that we have a desire

[56:49] for a bunch more I2 use in the community

[56:52] or need. So, um

[56:56] I think it kind of is what it is with

[56:58] the current system

[57:00] >> and that that's kind of the dilemma

[57:02] these things all the way around.

[57:03] >> Yeah. in

[57:07] um the little bit of reading I've done

[57:09] on Selen Township, you know, they had

[57:11] exclusionary zoning and got sued and

[57:13] lost and had a court agreement and now

[57:16] they have a data center that they didn't

[57:17] want. So, I don't think that approach

[57:19] was successful for them. I don't know

[57:21] that that's what we want to try then.

[57:26] No,

[57:28] we have enough uh of uh those little

[57:32] areas just for development

[57:37] around here.

[57:37] >> Yeah. We have a lot of legacy.

[57:40] >> Yeah.

[57:41] We prefer not to do anymore.

[57:45] Um because under the consent agreement,

[57:48] it's just whatever the court decides and

[57:52] >> we live with it.

[57:55] >> I think their buildings are 550,000

[57:57] square feet each.

[58:02] Yeah.

[58:04] Um

[58:05] >> I want to circle back to Len's question.

[58:07] So for me um you know even five megawws

[58:12] you know I did some googling it's

[58:13] depends on what your overall energy your

[58:16] average house uses but it's anywhere

[58:18] from 800 to 5,000 homes and you know

[58:21] that's half of our community. So to me

[58:24] that's absolutely a special land use if

[58:26] you're using that much power even if

[58:27] you're a little one. So personally I

[58:30] would say all data centers should be

[58:32] special in uses in mind.

[58:36] >> I I like that as well because we can

[58:39] like consolidate it all into one spot

[58:43] and not have general and specific. It's just

[58:49] specific.

[58:50] >> Yeah. And then I I mean I do think we

[58:53] need to address the accessory data center so we're not

[59:00] um excluding that. But I also think that

[59:05] the accessory data center with uh you

[59:08] know power up to 5 megawws is a little

[59:12] larger than an accessory

[59:16] as well.

[59:19] » Um I guess the question for me would be

[59:22] how would we know if something were

[59:26] accessory

[59:28] would be

[59:30] you said it's associated with a business

[59:38] » well I mean just going by the definition

[59:40] where it says a data center that is

[59:43] ancillary to the principal use of a lot

[59:46] parcel which is typically used solely to

[59:49] store otherwise support an individual's

[59:51] business data and technology needs,

[59:54] >> right?

[59:57] » I mean, policing it's easy because when

[1:00:01] we get the the plans, it's going to have

[1:00:04] the

[1:00:06] uh transformer size on it. I mean, 5

[1:00:09] megawatts, you pretty well have to have

[1:00:13] substation type equipment added.

[1:00:18] >> So, it would probably

[1:00:20] to a principal use, you know, that's

[1:00:22] approved and we have a site plan for it.

[1:00:26] And

[1:00:31] » yeah, I don't want to prevent somebody,

[1:00:35] you know, from

[1:00:37] um what's the fire protection company?

[1:00:40] Brigade, not brigade. Who does

[1:00:43] >> fire pros? No over in South

[1:00:47] can't they manufacture the sprinkler

[1:00:49] heads like if they want

[1:00:50] >> Thank you Viking like if they want to

[1:00:53] build you know a data center for their

[1:00:57] business use

[1:01:01] I mean maybe data center is not the

[1:01:03] appropriate term for that either right

[1:01:05] it's

[1:01:07] >> um but we have to have some lever that

[1:01:10] allows a business to actually

[1:01:16] Yeah, I mean

[1:01:17] >> network equipment.

[1:01:18] >> I work for Kent County and I manage a

[1:01:21] bunch of buildings and we have two data

[1:01:23] centers in two of the 15 buildings that

[1:01:25] I manage and those use a lot more power

[1:01:28] than the average building because it

[1:01:30] takes a lot to take care of moving all

[1:01:32] that information back and forth just for

[1:01:34] our county use.

[1:01:37] >> Yeah. So, we don't want to restrict a

[1:01:39] business from moving their own data,

[1:01:41] >> right?

[1:01:47] I you know it's that we want to have you

[1:01:52] know I think there's a big picture we're

[1:01:54] talking about data centers but we have

[1:01:55] to remember we can't have unintended

[1:01:59] consequences of

[1:02:02] this impacting what we're not intending

[1:02:05] it to either or vice versa

[1:02:09] >> I guess speaking about the enforcement

[1:02:12] question about you know sound and you

[1:02:15] know ticketing

[1:02:19] I'm curious are we able to have

[1:02:21] different

[1:02:24] enforcement thresholds or thresholds by

[1:02:27] use

[1:02:39] » I I would Any data center enforcement

[1:02:42] litigation would be circuit court

[1:02:44] lawsuits, not municipal civil

[1:02:46] infractions.

[1:02:47] >> But would it I mean it's got to start

[1:02:49] with some infraction, right? Otherwise,

[1:02:52] you know, what are we here to argue

[1:02:54] about in court? Got to be a violation.

[1:02:56] So, is it there's got to be some ticket

[1:02:59] written initially to start a

[1:03:01] >> um no you you can when you when you

[1:03:04] enforce an ordinance, you can do a

[1:03:06] municipal civil infraction district

[1:03:08] court. You can always bring an action in

[1:03:10] circuit court for an injunction

[1:03:13] which you know sometimes you do that

[1:03:15] with mining cases or other larger

[1:03:18] operations. You don't do the district

[1:03:20] court file a complaint and do the whole

[1:03:23] thing in circuit court.

[1:03:26] [clears throat] Can we put the like

[1:03:29] first violation is this second violation

[1:03:31] is that third violation tear it down. Is

[1:03:34] that can you do that in an ordinance?

[1:03:38] >> We already have the violations process

[1:03:42] in our code.

[1:03:44] >> But is that sufficient for this?

[1:03:47] >> Yeah.

[1:04:05] So it sounds like when we bring this

[1:04:07] back, we want to move all of the uses

[1:04:10] except for accessory to special use.

[1:04:13] That would help with some of this

[1:04:15] consistency issue. However, we are going

[1:04:18] to have accessory data centers still

[1:04:21] have to abide by the general provision

[1:04:23] section which will have its own

[1:04:26] standards. Um,

[1:04:30] and then

[1:04:32] I think that's the big change. And then

[1:04:35] these other comments,

[1:04:43] maybe we can get a better definition of

[1:04:45] what a sizewise,

[1:04:49] you know, uh,

[1:04:53] what's the word again? Sorry, I lost it.

[1:04:55] the accessory data center.

[1:04:58] I mean, even a megawatt's way too much.

[1:05:02] But again, I'm just guessing at that,

[1:05:06] you know, what what is can we define

[1:05:08] that?

[1:05:13] » I don't know. Well, I mean I think you

[1:05:16] say if the accessory is larger than the

[1:05:19] five then it becomes um

[1:05:25] » special but maybe five is too high.

[1:05:29] >> Yeah, I I'm thinking maybe five is too

[1:05:31] high. I mean maybe the small starts at

[1:05:34] one.

[1:05:40] » I mean that's a lot of power. Yeah, I'm

[1:05:43] confident that the counties are way less

[1:05:46] than one and we still you can there's an

[1:05:48] energy difference in our electric bill.

[1:05:52] >> Exactly. You know, maybe it's 500 K 5

[1:05:55] 500 KW, you know, half a megawatt

[1:05:59] um is where the small I I think we need

[1:06:02] to get a handle as to where the small

[1:06:05] starts because I think small at five is

[1:06:08] actually still quite big.

[1:06:19] Because the utility will always say,

[1:06:22] "Oh, we have the power and it's not

[1:06:24] going to cost cost any money anymore."

[1:06:26] And then they go to the public service

[1:06:28] commission and ask for more money.

[1:06:40] » [clears throat]

[1:06:46] » And there's a lot of work that's gone

[1:06:47] into it. I think we have a

[1:06:50] quite a bit to go on it as well.

[1:06:57] I mean,

[1:07:00] reviewing the noise [snorts]

[1:07:02] requirements and

[1:07:05] um

[1:07:08] in hours of operation, whether the noise

[1:07:10] should be consistent.

[1:07:13] You know, why should it be allowed to be

[1:07:16] louder during the day than it is at

[1:07:19] night?

[1:07:50] Ross, do you have any other questions or

[1:07:52] comments for us?

[1:07:54] >> No, there's a couple other things that I

[1:07:55] could um that day and I were talking

[1:07:57] about that, you know, maybe some things

[1:07:59] on that infrastructure things need to be

[1:08:01] paid for. There are some provisions in

[1:08:03] there, but clarify that they'll pay for

[1:08:06] things that maybe you normally wouldn't

[1:08:08] do and maybe the enforcability of that

[1:08:12] is um

[1:08:16] not part of the discussion as much as

[1:08:18] sometimes you put it in there and

[1:08:19] they'll pay it.

[1:08:22] you know that if you need to upgrade

[1:08:23] your fire equipment, if you need to do

[1:08:25] different things and there's a

[1:08:26] requirement in there,

[1:08:28] >> um that you have a basis for arguing

[1:08:30] that.

[1:08:32] >> Um and there were a couple other

[1:08:33] comments just that we were talking

[1:08:35] about, but you know, um I have seen the

[1:08:39] range of

[1:08:41] um what's allowed as small scale go down

[1:08:43] it seems like as these ordinances

[1:08:45] develop over time. So just what you're

[1:08:48] saying that they've gone they've gone

[1:08:49] down in the kilowatts. I've also seen

[1:08:51] them where they've done that and only

[1:08:53] for small scale added a maximum building

[1:08:56] size that's consistent with other uses

[1:08:58] in that district. You know that it has

[1:09:01] to be under this or that building size.

[1:09:05] So, so really exactly what you're

[1:09:07] talking about, you guys are kind of

[1:09:08] right there on where these things are

[1:09:11] developing.

[1:09:14] » Yeah, I guess I would piggyback that

[1:09:16] that's one thing that still makes me

[1:09:18] uncomfortable is the maximum building

[1:09:19] size being

[1:09:21] 000 square feet. I mean, I'd have to

[1:09:24] Google how big a Costco or, you know,

[1:09:27] Meer Super Center is, but I think it's

[1:09:29] smaller than that. Um, and

[1:09:35] because we don't have additional room

[1:09:38] left in industrial, the little bit of

[1:09:43] land that we have in the community, not

[1:09:45] necessarily a desire to change to add

[1:09:48] more. Um, I just feel like a building

[1:09:51] that big is in conflict with light

[1:09:53] industrial but we need to provide

[1:09:56] provision for all these things and that one in particular I just can't

[1:10:01] solve there's conflict seems too big but

[1:10:04] we need to allow something

[1:10:10] but you said you put that's 200

[1:10:13] over 40 acres

[1:10:17] » page 10 Yes.

[1:10:19] >> Okay.

[1:10:22] 150.

[1:10:23] >> Okay.

[1:10:24] >> Yeah. I was going to say they're like

[1:10:27] 100 to 200.

[1:10:30] Um yeah. So the minimum lot area is 40,

[1:10:34] but the maximum

[1:10:36] building you can put on it. A total of

[1:10:39] 200.

[1:10:40] Correct.

[1:10:41] >> Right. That's what it says right now.

[1:10:44] >> So if you split it up into four

[1:10:45] buildings, you 50,000 square foot

[1:10:47] buildings.

[1:10:48] >> I don't think That's what that's saying.

[1:10:49] That's just saying that the maximum

[1:10:50] building size is 200,000.

[1:10:52] >> You could have multiple buildings.

[1:10:54] >> No. Well, that's not how I read it at

[1:10:56] all. I I read it as basically the

[1:10:58] maximum

[1:11:00] square footage under a roof to be

[1:11:03] 200,000 square feet.

[1:11:04] >> You could have multiple roofs.

[1:11:06] >> See, that's not how I read that.

[1:11:08] >> It's Yeah, he didn't. He He read it. It

[1:11:11] has a lot coverage of 10%.

[1:11:13] >> Right.

[1:11:15] >> Plus or minus.

[1:11:17] >> That's the

[1:11:18] for lot

[1:11:21] of buildings and the total square

[1:11:23] footage under roof per

[1:11:29] » well it okay again to me that's how it

[1:11:31] read so you know if we need to make that

[1:11:37] you know more

[1:11:39] clear

[1:11:41] >> that you know it's a maximum 10% lot

[1:11:44] coverage in addition

[1:11:47] and you know, 200,000

[1:11:49] square feet,

[1:11:51] you know, is a total. That's what I read

[1:11:54] it to me, too. And I And to me, that's

[1:11:57] I mean, that's going to be pretty

[1:11:58] protectionary. You're not going to have

[1:12:00] any There's not a whole lot of data

[1:12:02] center developers, I don't think, that

[1:12:06] are going to be interested in paying

[1:12:07] that much for dirt and then having that

[1:12:11] kind of density. It's just

[1:12:13] >> Yeah, because Yeah. Now, reading it the

[1:12:15] other direction, I initially read it,

[1:12:17] how you read it, which again goes back

[1:12:20] to we always have to be clear on what

[1:12:22] we're

[1:12:23] >> saying. So, I appreciate that it was

[1:12:24] brought up because if you take the 40

[1:12:27] acres minus 1,000 square feet around the

[1:12:30] outside, just winging the math, that's

[1:12:34] 30 acres. I mean, but this thing's going

[1:12:36] to be, you know, you do this, it's going

[1:12:37] to be set up like four knocks, right?

[1:12:39] >> You know, where you got a building in

[1:12:41] the very middle, it's 200,000 square

[1:12:42] feet and you're going to have, you know,

[1:12:45] thousand foot you know, maybe 2,000 foot

[1:12:48] sight lines all around the building, you

[1:12:51] know, assuming they put it in the middle

[1:12:53] of the property, right?

[1:12:54] >> Yeah. You don't want to see, you know,

[1:12:57] say the 40 with a,000 acre setback or

[1:13:00] thousand foot setback makes it 30 just

[1:13:04] >> so I think this is all kind of

[1:13:05] consistent

[1:13:06] >> because we're talking about again like

[1:13:08] all these noise type things and you know

[1:13:11] what is because again I think you know

[1:13:13] they have they have the right to

[1:13:16] have noise on their own property, right?

[1:13:18] If they wanted it, if they could put it

[1:13:20] in a cylinder and shoot it up to space

[1:13:22] and nobody around them could hear the

[1:13:24] noise and it was 400 dB

[1:13:27] to the airport and that's dangerous. We

[1:13:29] should do that.

[1:13:30] >> Yeah, exactly. So, I mean, so, you know,

[1:13:32] I just I think this is consistent with

[1:13:35] basically, again, we're trying to keep

[1:13:38] noise, pollutants, you know, all sorts

[1:13:42] of things from even visual you know,

[1:13:46] offenses from omitting to the edges of

[1:13:49] the property.

[1:13:50] >> Well, let's pull that string and go down

[1:13:52] that road a little bit. Um, so if we say

[1:13:56] the minimum lot is 40 acres, let's just

[1:13:59] start. Does anybody have a any big issue

[1:14:02] with that?

[1:14:04] >> Okay. Then

[1:14:07] >> how many buildings?

[1:14:10] >> It wouldn't matter. I think as many as

[1:14:11] it would. Well, that's Do we care?

[1:14:17] >> Not really. They want to put it in four

[1:14:19] buildings or they want to put it in

[1:14:21] >> Yeah, but you're we're saying the 200

[1:14:23] they can do four buildings. Is that what

[1:14:24] you're okay with? Okay.

[1:14:26] >> Yeah. Yeah. I'm I'm

[1:14:28] >> You want the 40 acres? No more than

[1:14:30] 200,000. No matter how if they do

[1:14:33] >> uh 20

[1:14:35] >> 20 buildings, right?

[1:14:37] >> They built like Bill Gates's house and

[1:14:38] they decide that they want to put, you

[1:14:40] know, 15,000 feet underground and then

[1:14:43] just have a little couple popups here

[1:14:44] and there above the ground you know they

[1:14:47] want to put a grass rose on them and

[1:14:48] live like a hobbit that's fine you know

[1:14:52] I think but they just get you know you

[1:14:55] got they got 200,000 square feet that

[1:14:58] they can use so I mean to me it's going

[1:15:00] to be again economically I think it's

[1:15:03] going to be incredibly restrictive

[1:15:05] from an economic standpoint but I think

[1:15:07] it you know from our you know standpoint

[1:15:10] of trying to community, you know, what's

[1:15:13] the public, you know, the wealth

[1:15:15] interest of welfare. I mean,

[1:15:18] >> reason

[1:15:21] I I'm not disagreeing because I read it

[1:15:23] the same way as you.

[1:15:24] >> Yeah.

[1:15:25] >> I just want to make sure that

[1:15:27] >> Yeah. But it would have to be clear to

[1:15:28] the world that, you know, it's 200,000

[1:15:31] square feet is

[1:15:32] >> total

[1:15:32] >> the total developable under

[1:15:35] >> because I'm not just calling up

[1:15:37] >> we interpreted it differently. Correct.

[1:15:39] Right. already amongst you know six

[1:15:42] people here we already interpreted it

[1:15:44] different so that can't be that can't be

[1:15:46] the final language

[1:15:51] see you calculating

[1:15:53] >> yeah I just was trying to figure out uh

[1:15:56] if a 40acre parcel was a square it would

[1:15:59] be 1 1320 ft for each leg of the square

[1:16:04] and if we have a th00and foot setback

[1:16:07] frankly that's not

[1:16:10] if it's adjacent to residential. So

[1:16:14] >> that that is practically difficult. I

[1:16:16] guess that so maybe we have to

[1:16:18] reconsider that the setback 800 foot

[1:16:20] setback. I think we need to start

[1:16:21] looking at 60 acres or 80.

[1:16:23] >> Yeah. I mean, maybe we increase the

[1:16:25] setbacks. Correct.

[1:16:26] >> The setbacks. There's nothing wrong. I

[1:16:28] agree. There's nothing wrong with the

[1:16:29] setback, but

[1:16:32] >> um you know,

[1:16:35] again,

[1:16:37] but then we have to define total

[1:16:39] 200,000,

[1:16:41] >> right?

[1:16:42] >> Or whatever the number is.

[1:16:43] >> Well, then I guess I guess it is going

[1:16:44] to have to be larger than, you know,

[1:16:46] physically accomplish that. And I don't

[1:16:48] have any problem pushing say 60 or

[1:16:50] whatever, you know, or

[1:16:54] that's

[1:16:59] » because you end up with a lot of green

[1:17:00] space,

[1:17:01] >> right? A lot of green space, which is

[1:17:03] great,

[1:17:04] >> right? I mean, I think we had was all

[1:17:07] surrounded by forest or surrounded by a

[1:17:09] mow yard or whatever they choose to do.

[1:17:12] as long as it's been a setback and you

[1:17:15] know you I just think you're a lot less

[1:17:17] issues

[1:17:18] you know like given it that space

[1:17:24] and there is nothing saying

[1:17:28] that they can't plant trees and stuff in

[1:17:32] the setback correct I just want to

[1:17:35] do we have landscape requirements that

[1:17:38] we need to tie this

[1:17:39] >> we reference that

[1:17:40] >> is Is it is it enough?

[1:17:45] I I'm not asking you an answer now, but

[1:17:47] it's just is do we have enough if if

[1:17:51] we're going to 60 and 1,000 square feet,

[1:17:54] do we have enough landscaping

[1:17:56] requirements? And is the landscaping

[1:17:58] requirements on all sides just the road

[1:18:02] frontage?

[1:18:04] >> It's the same. I mean, we'd say that it

[1:18:08] has to comply with chapter 28 and then

[1:18:11] our new architectural standards.

[1:18:14] Um, also have the landscaping and

[1:18:16] buffering standards. But we do say an

[1:18:19] additional burn offering landscaping

[1:18:21] shall be required along any property

[1:18:24] shared with an adjacent property that's

[1:18:26] in a residential district.

[1:18:30] >> What if it's not zone res? I mean, maybe

[1:18:32] we want to change it so it's just

[1:18:36] adjacent to any

[1:18:44] » this is what happens. We start pulling

[1:18:45] strings and figure out other areas of

[1:18:47] the ordinance that we need to address at

[1:18:50] the same time. Well, as far as having

[1:18:53] two or three buildings, I mean, we

[1:18:55] regulate how many buildings will go on

[1:18:57] residential lots and every other lots.

[1:19:00] Why wouldn't we regulate how many

[1:19:01] buildings they can have?

[1:19:06] I'm I just, you know, personally, I

[1:19:10] think that's fine. I go ahead and

[1:19:12] regulated. I just think in my mind, it

[1:19:14] doesn't really matter too much, you

[1:19:16] know, how many buildings they're going

[1:19:18] to do. They're not going to put up, you

[1:19:20] know,

[1:19:22] 10 by 10,

[1:19:24] you know what I mean?

[1:19:27] >> Yeah. They want to do it in large

[1:19:30] football field type things like you see.

[1:19:33] to switch along east Paris.

[1:19:42] » You think you have enough to go on this

[1:19:44] one?

[1:19:45] >> So, yeah, increasing the area as well.

[1:19:51] >> I'd like another to look at the land,

[1:19:53] you know, do we need the buring, the

[1:19:56] landscaping,

[1:19:58] >> all that

[1:20:01] >> that we're doing to

[1:20:04] Yeah, maybe it's like plant they got to

[1:20:06] plant, you know, a row of trays, you

[1:20:09] know, four feet, four trees deep.

[1:20:25] » Yeah. Patter.

[1:20:32] Yeah. So I think next steps are we get

[1:20:37] it split look at the other different

[1:20:40] sections [snorts] that we tal you know

[1:20:42] that we talked about talk square footage

[1:20:45] or acreage split foot and

[1:20:50] then you know look at some of the noise

[1:20:54] requirements

[1:20:56] and get another

[1:21:00] draft, I think. But I don't I don't

[1:21:04] think even at our the next draft is

[1:21:07] anywhere close to the final because

[1:21:09] we're going to want to to Mr. Bisser's

[1:21:12] point is to make sure that we all are

[1:21:16] interpreting it the same way

[1:21:18] >> when it comes to it because we don't want to have our

[1:21:23] township attorney trying to explain

[1:21:25] that's not what we meant. when we wrote

[1:21:28] it

[1:21:33] » and it's a rapidly changing environment

[1:21:35] and even 30 days from now there could be

[1:21:37] new and better information than exists

[1:21:38] today.

[1:21:39] >> Right.

[1:21:41] So, it's

[1:21:43] I mean I think we're getting

[1:21:46] we're farther along than where we

[1:21:48] started, but I don't we're not halfway

[1:21:51] through the marathon yet.

[1:21:58] Unless others have different opinion on

[1:22:02] that.

[1:22:05] >> We'd like to have a good draft for you

[1:22:06] next time.

[1:22:07] >> Yeah, that's what we do. Just keeping

[1:22:10] closer on it and we'll get it

[1:22:11] eventually.

[1:22:13] >> And I know the township is not

[1:22:15] interested in letting the moratorum

[1:22:17] expire without having an ordinance in

[1:22:20] place. So that will

[1:22:26] progress. We're moving forward and we'll

[1:22:31] make sure that we

[1:22:33] >> Okay. So my I'd like just some agenda

[1:22:37] items.

[1:22:38] >> Oh, hold on. Hold on.

[1:22:40] >> Maybe under number nine.

[1:22:43] >> Okay. I'm anxious. I want

[1:22:45] >> Did you [laughter] Did you write them

[1:22:46] down so you won't forget?

[1:22:47] >> It's right here. No, I didn't. I didn't.

[1:22:49] That's why I got to get it out.

[1:22:51] >> Might want to write them down.

[1:22:54] All right. Any other discussion on 7A?

[1:23:00] » Thank you, Miss Len and Ross for what

[1:23:04] you've done into it. Sorry, we're giving

[1:23:05] you a lot more work, but

[1:23:08] we want to get it right.

[1:23:13] All right, at this time we will do the

[1:23:15] public comment for five minutes for

[1:23:18] anyone who would like to speak.

[1:23:25] You have five minutes this time, right?

[1:23:27] >> Correct. Okay.

[1:23:30] Um I'd like to uh visit the uh the sound

[1:23:33] issue had some comments on that but

[1:23:36] [clears throat]

[1:23:37] um the if you followed what's going on

[1:23:41] in the country in the area of sound in

[1:23:43] the in the

[1:23:45] uh data centers something called infra

[1:23:48] infrasound is the new concern.

[1:23:52] um in the minutes or in the section here

[1:23:54] I see references to dB the sound level

[1:23:57] with a parenthesis that implies very

[1:24:01] rigorously that the sound equipment that

[1:24:03] measured that simply used the 20 hertz

[1:24:06] to 20 kHz the human human hearing band

[1:24:10] most of us don't come anywhere near

[1:24:11] hearing that range but it's the area

[1:24:13] below 20 hertz that's referred to now as

[1:24:18] infrasound

[1:24:19] and it's you to measure that takes

[1:24:22] different equipment and you'll know if

[1:24:24] you see DB with a C in parenthesis that

[1:24:27] that's included the entire frequency

[1:24:30] band zero to 20 kHz. Um, it has to be

[1:24:35] addressed because they're finding now

[1:24:37] all over the country, in fact, there's a

[1:24:38] lot of lawsuits now popping up against

[1:24:41] municipalities and the data centers

[1:24:43] because there are very very identifiable

[1:24:46] physical ailments that are now

[1:24:48] associated with this infrasound.

[1:24:51] Um, it's not attenuated by the usual

[1:24:55] methods. Um, walls won't do it. In fact,

[1:24:59] data center in South South Dakota

[1:25:01] discovered after spending $5 million on

[1:25:04] special sound deadening walls around

[1:25:07] their facility that it didn't help the

[1:25:09] infrasound one bit. It was still being

[1:25:11] propagated. The reason for that is it

[1:25:13] propagates through the ground as well.

[1:25:16] Um, it can travel great distance. We're

[1:25:18] talking miles. We're talking 5 to 10

[1:25:20] miles. Obviously, it gets less the

[1:25:22] further away, but setbacks probably not

[1:25:25] going to solve that unless you're

[1:25:27] talking setbacks, and that's not likely

[1:25:29] to happen. Um, basically it has to be

[1:25:32] stopped at the source and the data

[1:25:34] centers are wrestling, the builders of

[1:25:36] the data centers are wrestling with that

[1:25:38] problem. Now, uh, cooling towers seem to

[1:25:41] be what it's related to. And anytime you

[1:25:43] got rotating machinery and the machinery

[1:25:46] gets out of phase a little bit, you end

[1:25:48] up it ends up producing these subsonic

[1:25:52] uh not subsonic but sub below 10 10 or

[1:25:56] 20 hertz down into the infrared or

[1:25:59] infrasound region. And these have to be dealt with um usually

[1:26:05] vibrations dampers or something like

[1:26:07] that.

[1:26:08] essentially a new design of the cooling

[1:26:10] towers. And if you looked at any of

[1:26:12] these big centers, you're talking maybe

[1:26:15] a hundred of these cooling towers and

[1:26:17] that's contributing to this this

[1:26:19] infrasound. Um, I've got a name of a

[1:26:23] good video, a YouTube video that we all of us here should watch. It's called

[1:26:28] Data Center Noise, a smarter approach to

[1:26:31] global problems.

[1:26:33] Um, I've got a copy of the Alageney

[1:26:36] County, Pennsylvania noise and

[1:26:38] vibration. They address these issues,

[1:26:41] the sound issues in four pages in their

[1:26:44] um their documentation. I would I would

[1:26:48] suggest that we all go back and maybe

[1:26:49] look at that to see because they've got

[1:26:51] tables, they address the DBC, they

[1:26:53] address a number of other levels of

[1:26:55] sound, too. And uh I think for this, you

[1:26:58] know, for the safety of the community,

[1:27:01] uh the township and you know, we don't

[1:27:03] want to be subject to lawsuits. I think

[1:27:05] we need to include that in our

[1:27:08] specifications. Make sure that that's

[1:27:10] because that's addressed and uh and we

[1:27:13] may have to say let's give it six months

[1:27:16] or a year to allow that to settle out

[1:27:19] because it has to be settled out. And uh

[1:27:22] and I think if we don't include that um

[1:27:26] that that's a huge oversight. So

[1:27:28] >> and that's what you passed out, right?

[1:27:31] >> Is is that the one from uh

[1:27:34] >> Alagany

[1:27:37] Delaware and

[1:27:43] » I'm I'll check you out afterwards. It's

[1:27:46] a It's the one from Alageney Township is

[1:27:48] rather u

[1:27:51] rather technical, but it may be that

[1:27:54] that's what it'll take. And there's ways

[1:27:56] of measuring it. Um give you an idea

[1:28:00] just an experience of infrasound. You

[1:28:04] remember the days when we had the Boeing

[1:28:05] 727 with the two engines mounted on the

[1:28:08] body and the back? DC9s are the same

[1:28:11] way. If you ever flew on a Boeing 727

[1:28:15] and sat in the back seat, flew for very

[1:28:18] long, when you got off, your brain said,

[1:28:20] "Don't ever do this again." Because

[1:28:22] those engines, the spools on the engines

[1:28:25] would get out of sync a little bit in

[1:28:27] terms of RPM, and you'd end up with like

[1:28:29] a one or a two second modulation, the

[1:28:32] engine noise, and it's just a pounding

[1:28:34] noise. I've experienced it. I think a

[1:28:36] lot of you probably experienced that.

[1:28:38] It's a pounding noise. You don't hear

[1:28:40] that noise. you hear the engine noise,

[1:28:42] but it certainly affects your brain and

[1:28:44] your body and uh to the point where you

[1:28:47] don't want to do it again. So,

[1:28:49] >> thank you.

[1:28:50] Greg.

[1:29:06] » Didn't really want to follow him up

[1:29:07] because I'm such an amateur at this. It

[1:29:09] was really informative. Um, my name is

[1:29:12] Melissa Katie and I live in Greymore. U,

[1:29:14] most of what I've kind of I feel like

[1:29:15] you guys addressed a lot of the things

[1:29:17] that I was concerned with tonight. I

[1:29:18] just had a couple things I wanted to

[1:29:20] just maybe go over in my notes, but

[1:29:22] definitely want to thank you for all the

[1:29:23] hard work and time you guys have put

[1:29:24] into this because it is even me googling

[1:29:26] is feels like a ton of work. Um, I did

[1:29:31] look at in my own research today, I had

[1:29:33] looked at the size of buildings, what

[1:29:35] you had to address for how big a regular

[1:29:37] size building is. Like the typical Home

[1:29:38] Depot is only 105,000 square feet.

[1:29:41] Davenport's biggest building over by

[1:29:43] where this property is that we're

[1:29:44] concerned with is 140,000. So, it is a

[1:29:47] pretty significantly large building if

[1:29:48] it is one single building of that size.

[1:29:51] So, um, it doesn't technically fit with

[1:29:54] I wouldn't think the buildings around

[1:29:55] it, especially with the residential

[1:29:57] which are much smaller. Um, The other

[1:29:59] thing was the obviously I like the

[1:30:00] restrictions on noise but from

[1:30:02] everything I've read data centers run

[1:30:03] pretty much the same decibels all day

[1:30:05] every day doing the same thing. The

[1:30:07] generators seem to be what change like

[1:30:10] they would have to run those during

[1:30:11] certain times but everything I've been

[1:30:12] seeing has been that they run a constant

[1:30:16] same hum or whatever the sound is is

[1:30:19] going to be through the day and night.

[1:30:20] So if there are restrictions on time

[1:30:21] periods are how effective are they if it

[1:30:24] runs at these same levels all the time.

[1:30:26] Um I also done some research on that

[1:30:29] infrasound. Um not I don't know nearly

[1:30:32] as much about it, but I did see things

[1:30:35] um about the negative health impacts. Um

[1:30:37] also that when you think of it in the

[1:30:39] terms of a plane or something that

[1:30:41] you're on for a short period of time,

[1:30:42] these are 247 365 of this sound coming

[1:30:46] through. Um the National Institute of

[1:30:49] Health has a report on that also that

[1:30:50] it's they're thinking that it causes

[1:30:52] cardiac issues and affects people with

[1:30:54] autoimmune diseases just people without

[1:30:57] health issues causing all sorts of brain

[1:30:59] fogs and all different headaches and

[1:31:02] different things that are coming up and

[1:31:04] because this is such an everchanging

[1:31:06] industry um I was reading about this

[1:31:09] again not an expert this is just

[1:31:10] something maybe to let you guys go do

[1:31:12] your own research on too that they're

[1:31:14] moving from some crypto mining to I data

[1:31:17] centers which are then using instead of

[1:31:19] the average 300 megawatts the same

[1:31:22] facility would use a thousand megawatts

[1:31:24] and so I would just have questions on is

[1:31:26] there I don't I don't know if there's an

[1:31:27] ability to do this but a cap at some

[1:31:29] point or you had mentioned before about

[1:31:31] the residents getting the costs at some

[1:31:35] point if they're just increasing their

[1:31:37] usage in these same size facilities at

[1:31:39] what point the only thing I could find

[1:31:41] is that we would have to go as residents

[1:31:43] and look up all of the reports for usage

[1:31:46] data uh and then compare from year to

[1:31:47] year and that just doesn't seem like as

[1:31:50] residents we would have much power to

[1:31:52] really fight that and even if we did

[1:31:54] find discrepancies where we go with that

[1:31:56] information and who would protect us. So

[1:31:59] I was just concerned with seeing that

[1:32:00] they're using more and more and more

[1:32:02] they're not like scaling down with the

[1:32:04] advance in technology they seem to be

[1:32:06] increasing what they can fit into that

[1:32:08] space. Um

[1:32:11] oh the one question I had was on the

[1:32:13] time frame for decommissioning is that

[1:32:15] something that could take 10, 15, 20

[1:32:17] years or is there a specific amount of

[1:32:19] time because that abandoned building

[1:32:20] could just be like rotting there in the

[1:32:21] meantime while we wait for it? Um

[1:32:23] especially like the properties we're

[1:32:24] talking about are so close to our

[1:32:26] houses. You don't want animals, people,

[1:32:28] any kind of things that come with that.

[1:32:31] Um the moratorum, I don't know if as far

[1:32:35] as I know, it wasn't

[1:32:38] discussed or anything. We I'm just

[1:32:40] wanted to support still extending that

[1:32:42] moratorium. there's so much more

[1:32:44] research to do and just hopefully um you

[1:32:47] guys get the time you need to be able to

[1:32:48] do all of the research. Um and that's

[1:32:51] really it. I just wanted to say great

[1:32:53] job on everything so far and those are

[1:32:55] my little notes.

[1:32:56] >> Thank you.

[1:33:11] Hello. Uh, Danielle again.

[1:33:15] Um, so I'm the one that has a

[1:33:17] preschooler going to Dutton.

[1:33:19] And so I really just want you to take

[1:33:21] what these people are saying in

[1:33:22] consideration and your school is on the

[1:33:25] border of Gaines Township who has

[1:33:28] Microsoft

[1:33:29] um, trying to put in a data center on

[1:33:31] 76th and Patter. And so if you guys

[1:33:34] could make a committee, I've been to the

[1:33:36] school board meetings and I've talked to

[1:33:38] them like what can you guys do to talk

[1:33:41] with gains to make sure that you guys

[1:33:43] are doing a great job with some of your

[1:33:44] really specifics? Um you know numbers and enforcement and

[1:33:51] you're on I don't know what you guys can

[1:33:52] do across township lines but that

[1:33:54] Patterson and 76 area. Um,

[1:33:58] so trying to like enforce like what you

[1:34:01] guys would like to have either working

[1:34:03] with Gaines and Dan Wells over there to

[1:34:07] get them to maybe modify some of their

[1:34:10] um specific specifics um for their

[1:34:14] ordinance update because they're trying

[1:34:16] to work on one as well um or encourage

[1:34:19] them to follow your numbers because you

[1:34:21] have residents budding up next to them.

[1:34:23] Um but just for reference, the Amazon

[1:34:25] building I has about a 400,000 a 400,000

[1:34:29] square foot um footing. Um it's two

[1:34:32] stories, so it's like 850,000 square

[1:34:34] feet, but you guys have a limit to how

[1:34:36] tall your building can be, which is

[1:34:38] good. Um their burm is like probably a

[1:34:41] 24 foot burm, which is a decent size,

[1:34:43] but they don't have enough trees. So, I

[1:34:45] definitely would update your trees and

[1:34:48] foilage and make sure they're at least

[1:34:49] like 10 year old trees, lots of bushes,

[1:34:51] because they don't have enough stuff on

[1:34:53] that wall, that BM. Um, and as you hear,

[1:34:58] you um should consider more information

[1:35:01] about the DBC infrasound noise. Um,

[1:35:05] especially with the school nearby. Um,

[1:35:07] you know, and if you have the special

[1:35:09] education students that are going to be

[1:35:11] in that building or just outside during

[1:35:14] playtime or inside trying to learn, um,

[1:35:17] that's going to probably affect them

[1:35:18] because of how close it is. And again,

[1:35:22] it is 247 noise. Um, it's not Monday

[1:35:25] through Friday, 8 to 5, right? It's all

[1:35:27] day every day. So, I'm really glad that

[1:35:29] you are trying to have like a daytime

[1:35:32] noise limit and a nighttime noise limit,

[1:35:34] but we should also be addressing the

[1:35:37] vibration noise, the infrasound DBC or

[1:35:40] DBZ. Again, I haven't been able to do

[1:35:43] like really good research on the

[1:35:45] specifics of that. [clears throat]

[1:35:47] Um,

[1:35:50] and maybe some more. I I saw something

[1:35:53] about following Eagle standards in

[1:35:55] there. I'm not sure if that includes

[1:35:56] like water retention and because they're

[1:35:59] going to because they may have a lot of

[1:36:00] cement, see what what they would use for

[1:36:03] like pesticide usage. I'm sure you have

[1:36:05] rules about that for any other

[1:36:07] commercial place. So, that's probably

[1:36:10] covered. Um, and yeah, definitely what

[1:36:13] happens if they don't comply. So, what I

[1:36:16] saw you have like a spot for them to

[1:36:18] have money set aside for when they don't

[1:36:20] comply with your rules, but how are you

[1:36:23] going to know they're not complying? Are

[1:36:25] you doing regular testing and by whom?

[1:36:28] [clears throat] And um

[1:36:31] something in there about trying to use

[1:36:32] the most clean energy available at the

[1:36:34] time. So, like right now their diesel

[1:36:36] generators have there's like different

[1:36:38] versions of them and like Switch said

[1:36:41] they're going to use the version four

[1:36:43] diesel generator which better than what

[1:36:45] Gaines Township has in their ordinance,

[1:36:47] but who knows when this is going to

[1:36:49] happen, right? Things are constantly

[1:36:50] changing. So, have something in there

[1:36:52] that says like the best of the best

[1:36:54] available at the time. Maybe maybe leave

[1:36:56] a little open instead of being too

[1:36:58] specific as to like, oh, make sure you

[1:37:00] use this diesel generator. And then in

[1:37:02] 10 years, it's like, oh, just kidding.

[1:37:04] It's better now. And I'm sure you guys

[1:37:06] can update your ordinances over time,

[1:37:08] too. Um, but uh just um

[1:37:15] Yeah. Um, so anyway, and I just

[1:37:17] encourage you to maybe get in uh chats

[1:37:21] with gains and the school board for the school issue that's going to be

[1:37:26] right on the border next to the

[1:37:28] Microsoft one. Okay.

[1:37:30] >> Thanks.

[1:37:31] >> Thank you.

[1:37:37] » Okay. Hey, Deb Steady. Um, want to refer

[1:37:40] to the document that I handed out and

[1:37:43] um, this is a model ordinance. It

[1:37:46] represents noise in about four and a

[1:37:49] half pages. Think about what our current

[1:37:52] draft how that addresses noise at this

[1:37:55] point. So, the point was made, how are

[1:37:58] you going to know how to comply? First

[1:38:00] of the 60 DBA or the 55 or 45, it's

[1:38:05] meaningless. It's It's what you

[1:38:08] suggested. Somebody going up with a

[1:38:10] little decimal meter and saying, "What

[1:38:13] is the amount of noise here?" That's not

[1:38:16] how the noise needs to be calculated. It

[1:38:19] needs to be a a continuous an LEQ, a

[1:38:23] continuous level to accommodate the big

[1:38:27] noises, the small noises. And basically,

[1:38:30] it averages it out. it has it in a

[1:38:33] bucket and it's done over a period of

[1:38:36] time, sometimes 24 hours. You need to

[1:38:38] have a compliance metric if you think

[1:38:40] you're going to enforce a noise

[1:38:42] ordinance piece to what you're doing.

[1:38:45] So, I really would stress [snorts] for

[1:38:48] you to take a look at this and Ross

[1:38:50] perhaps you could tell me who was the

[1:38:52] noise expert that helped you draft that

[1:38:54] portion of the noise section. Were you

[1:38:59] relying on noise experts or how did that

[1:39:04] come about?

[1:39:11] » As we've

[1:39:13] said before, this is your time to talk,

[1:39:15] not for us to answer your questions.

[1:39:17] >> Okay, that's a good point. So let's have

[1:39:19] a public workshop where the public can

[1:39:21] come and get answers to their questions,

[1:39:25] bring data, have a reasonable discussion

[1:39:28] versus being cut off from providing

[1:39:31] anything new that might help us better

[1:39:35] protect our township and our citizens

[1:39:37] and our children.

[1:39:40] The the control that's being exercised

[1:39:43] by the chair is really a very um

[1:39:48] What do I want to say?

[1:39:50] Uh, discouraging

[1:39:53] because to me that says you don't want

[1:39:54] to learn anything new.

[1:40:00] I want to learn something new. We've all

[1:40:02] been working very hard as citizens to

[1:40:05] educate ourselves and to provide good

[1:40:07] information to you.

[1:40:10] And so, respect that, please.

[1:40:13] And give it give us some answers.

[1:40:17] We spend our time to come here and to

[1:40:19] say our attorney that our taxpayer

[1:40:22] dollars fund cannot answer a citizen

[1:40:25] question.

[1:40:28] Does that make sense to you? It doesn't

[1:40:30] make sense to me. Thank you for your

[1:40:31] time.

[1:40:46] Seeing no further public comment, we

[1:40:48] will close the extended public comment

[1:40:50] period for this time. Commissioner

[1:40:52] comments. Mr. Donovan, I know you have

[1:40:53] something.

[1:40:54] >> Yeah. Yeah.

[1:40:55] >> All right. I wanted to add one one uh

[1:40:58] agenda item. I would like to have a

[1:41:01] discussion and you know I don't know how

[1:41:04] we notice it out and how all these

[1:41:05] things kind of work in the background

[1:41:07] but I would like to see if we can talk

[1:41:10] about increasing the minimum lot size

[1:41:14] for agricultural and rural residentially

[1:41:17] zoned properties.

[1:41:20] All right. I would like to kind of talk

[1:41:22] about that. And then the backdrop of

[1:41:24] this is obviously, you know, the

[1:41:26] amendment to Michigan Land Vision Act.

[1:41:30] Okay. That's kind of the backdrop of

[1:41:34] why, you know, I would like to have that

[1:41:38] discussion and those two I think kind of

[1:41:40] think go hand in hand in implementation

[1:41:42] of the updates land division act and

[1:41:44] then what we're allowing as far as

[1:41:47] minimum lot size for some of our zoning

[1:41:50] here.

[1:41:53] >> So if we can put that on the agenda. Um

[1:41:56] and then the second thing would be again

[1:41:59] just a Quick discussion discussion on uh

[1:42:03] you know whether or not to uh send

[1:42:07] basically the uh the board a request for

[1:42:11] an extension of the uh

[1:42:15] >> moratorum

[1:42:17] on data centers.

[1:42:19] >> It's October.

[1:42:21] >> I think it's October right now. So if we

[1:42:23] do it now then we you know kind of come

[1:42:25] toward the end of month September send

[1:42:27] it over to the board. I think the idea

[1:42:30] is to get closer. We have a couple

[1:42:32] meetings between now and the moratorum.

[1:42:35] >> We already did. Thank you. We already

[1:42:38] did send a recommendation to the

[1:42:40] township board. They're aware of the

[1:42:42] desire to extend it and as I mentioned

[1:42:46] earlier there there is no don't believe

[1:42:49] that there's a desire to let that lapse

[1:42:51] but the advice of our township attorney

[1:42:53] was to get closer to that before

[1:42:57] extending it because um we don't want to

[1:43:00] be perceived as just blocking that use.

[1:43:04] um that it's best to kind of live live

[1:43:07] that time frame out and and have the

[1:43:10] next one start.

[1:43:11] >> Okay. So, it will be

[1:43:13] >> that'll be you're uh putting that on

[1:43:16] your calendar.

[1:43:18] >> Yes. Yes. We've already sent it to the

[1:43:20] township board to the clerk clerk's

[1:43:23] assistant. They're aware of it. We've

[1:43:25] already had emails with our township.

[1:43:27] >> Okay. So, that would show up then on an

[1:43:30] agenda item for the planning commission

[1:43:32] in the

[1:43:32] >> No, no. You as a planning commission

[1:43:34] have already recommended one to the

[1:43:36] township board, so we don't need to do

[1:43:38] it again.

[1:43:39] >> So you're saying the current goes to

[1:43:40] October,

[1:43:41] >> correct?

[1:43:42] >> And then we've already recommended the

[1:43:43] extension after the

[1:43:45] >> correct. And we didn't need to recommend

[1:43:47] it anyway. The board would do it, but

[1:43:49] yes,

[1:43:50] >> it's already um

[1:43:52] >> All right. So that's So we're one we're one recommendation out

[1:43:56] already, so we're good.

[1:43:57] >> Yeah.

[1:43:58] >> Okay.

[1:43:58] >> Yeah, we're good. And then as to the

[1:44:01] land,

[1:44:02] >> I know this is, you know, it's

[1:44:03] important.

[1:44:04] >> It's very important and they're they're

[1:44:06] very aware. They're they're aware of

[1:44:08] that. Um

[1:44:10] the

[1:44:15] lot area, you did get a memo in your

[1:44:18] last packet about the land division act.

[1:44:21] So maybe if you'd like, I can email that

[1:44:24] to you guys again. um because

[1:44:28] Chairman Curtis, you weren't here at

[1:44:30] that meeting to discuss it. But that is

[1:44:31] something that we do need to get on top

[1:44:33] of, you know, before the end of the year

[1:44:37] since that land division act comes

[1:44:41] um into play starting at the end of

[1:44:44] March.

[1:44:45] So, we want to look at the implication

[1:44:47] of that and if there are changes to our

[1:44:49] zoning ordinance, we want to get those

[1:44:53] um adopted before them.

[1:44:55] Do we have any maybe this is a attorney

[1:44:59] question. Do we have any clear guidance

[1:45:01] from the state or or is this one of

[1:45:06] these things that needs to be litigated

[1:45:07] before we figure out what the actual

[1:45:11] we're allowed to do

[1:45:14] >> on the land division decreasing lot

[1:45:17] size?

[1:45:19] >> Yes. Are you are any of your clients,

[1:45:22] Ross, talking about the implications of

[1:45:25] the um the 10 splits? Um

[1:45:31] and when we did our analysis, it looks

[1:45:34] like with we have two acre minimums. So

[1:45:38] with 10 splits, there's probably the

[1:45:40] potential for one additional split than

[1:45:43] the four that can happen. Now,

[1:45:46] >> if you're not ready to talk about that,

[1:45:48] that's fine.

[1:45:49] And as I'll yeah, I'll share that memo

[1:45:52] with you. We can look at Yeah,

[1:45:55] >> I think a lot of communities are really

[1:45:57] working on the data center stuff right

[1:45:59] now and then we're going to be moving

[1:46:01] into the land division shortly after.

[1:46:06] » Let's go up here.

[1:46:07] >> I'm good. Mr. Mlean,

[1:46:11] >> I just want to thank everyone for their

[1:46:13] interests and efforts and attention to

[1:46:16] this matter and I think we're figuring

[1:46:19] this out for our community and

[1:46:21] appreciate what you're bringing to us.

[1:46:23] And there was also a comment um of how

[1:46:28] we can

[1:46:29] better communicate maybe with Gaines

[1:46:31] Township and also potentially how we

[1:46:33] could advocate for the school board. Um

[1:46:35] Commissioner Clement, who's

[1:46:36] unfortunately absent today, is actually

[1:46:38] on the school board and might even be

[1:46:40] the reason he's absent because I think

[1:46:42] these meetings partially conflict with

[1:46:44] the schoolboard time. So um we we have a

[1:46:47] good connection there. The community is

[1:46:48] really well connected to the

[1:46:50] superintendent and leadership in the

[1:46:52] school too. So just wanted to reassure

[1:46:55] you that the lines of communication are

[1:46:57] open. Um and that's all

[1:47:04] » motion to

[1:47:06] hold on.

[1:47:08] >> Do we have any correspondence or staff

[1:47:09] updates?

[1:47:12] Uh, no, no updates, but we look forward

[1:47:14] to seeing you at the September 21st

[1:47:16] meeting. We have a public hearing for

[1:47:19] amending the contractor yard special

[1:47:22] land use to the north, the harder site.

[1:47:27] >> They want to build another accessory

[1:47:29] building. Um, and then we have the

[1:47:32] homebased business on that agenda as

[1:47:33] well.

[1:47:35] >> So, no meeting the first of the month.

[1:47:37] >> Labor Day of October.

[1:47:38] >> Labor Day.

[1:47:40] >> Oh. Correct. Yeah. Yeah. That was never

[1:47:42] even step.

[1:47:44] >> I will be out the 21st.

[1:47:46] >> You'll be out the 21st.

[1:47:49] Chairman Curtis, you as well.

[1:47:57] hopefully everybody else will be

[1:47:58] here because we do need a hearing item.

[1:48:04] » Motion to

[1:48:07] support. Motion by visser uh support by

[1:48:10] Bradshaw. All those in favor say I.

[1:48:12] >> I.

[1:48:13] >> All those opposed. Meeting a journ.

[1:48:20] [laughter]

[1:48:23] I'm not going to

[1:48:26] [cough and clears throat]

[1:48:28] >> You can keep that. You can keep it if

[1:48:30] you want.

[1:48:31] >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. That's why I give it

[1:48:32] to you. I'll get a whole new one.

[1:48:35] >> I knew you I knew you were more

[1:48:38] like you just want to know what was

[1:48:39] going on. We send this like postcard or

[1:48:42] whatever in the mail that says

[1:48:44] >> you're affected by this.

[1:48:46] >> Yeah. I guess my concern more than

[1:48:49] anything is that good healthy

[1:48:51] communities are communities for all

[1:48:54] ages.

[1:48:54] >> Well, we

[1:48:58] exactly we all can't

[1:49:01] >> I mean I wanted you to have it that

[1:49:04] information is typically available on

[1:49:08] that citizen's going to go look.

[1:49:12] >> You'd have to find her. But I had a good

[1:49:14] career and I lived to go and

[1:49:16] >> it's not nec

Caledonia Township Planning Commission Meeting - 08-17-2026

Transcript